LOGIN

Consultancy For Evaluation Of Country Strategy tender at Plan International Zambia

New

Plan International

Website :

2 Days Ago

CONSULTANCY FOR EVALUATION OF COUNTRY STRATEGY (FY22 TO FY26)

Plan International Zambia•Consultancy•Zambia•1w ago

1. About Plan International

We strive to advance children’s rights and equality for girls all over the world. As an independent development and humanitarian organization, we work alongside children, young people, our supporters and partners to tackle the root causes of the challenges facing girls and all vulnerable children. We support children’s rights from birth until they reach adulthood and enable children to prepare for and respond to crises and adversity. We drive changes in practice and policy at local, national and global levels using our reach, experience and knowledge. For over 80 years we have been building powerful partnerships for children, and we are active in over 75 countries.

2.0 Background

Plan International has been operating in Zambia since 1996 and to-date continues to work in 5 provinces namely; Luapula, Eastern, Central, Southern and Lusaka. Currently operating under the 5-year Country Strategy (2022-2026) with an extension of one year to 2027 which was developed through a consultative process from a child rights perceptive with various key stakeholders. Specifically, the CS was implemented in following districts; Lusaka, Chongwe, Kafue, Mansa, Chembe, Milenge, Mwansabombwe, Nchelenge, Chienge, Chifunabuli, Kawambwa, Chadiza, Vubwi, Katete, Petauke, Zimba, Sinazongwe, Gwembe, Chibombo, Chisamba, Kapiri Mposhi and Mkushi. Specifically, the Country Strategy was implemented in three (3) Programme Areas namely: LEARN [Inclusive Quality Education (IQE) and Skills and Opportunities for Youth Employment and Entrepreneurship (SOYEE)], DECIDE [Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) and protection] and THRIVE [Early Childhood Development (ECD) and Disaster Risk Management (DRM).

3.0 Evaluation Focus

3.1 Purpose of the Evaluation of the CS

PIZ’s Country Strategy for the period 2022-2026 that aims at ensuring that vulnerable and excluded adolescent girls reach their full potential is coming to an end of its implementation on 30th June 2027(FY27). In this regard PIZ intends to conduct an evaluation of the current CS.

The purpose of the evaluation are as follows:

To assess the extent to which the Country Strategy has achieved its intended results and strategic objectives, including the factors that have enabled or constrained progress.

To assess the contribution of the Country Strategy to significant and sustained changes at individual, household, community and national levels, and identify the factors influencing the sustainability of these changes.

To generate evidence-based lessons and actionable recommendations from the design and implementation of the FY22–FY27 Country Strategy, including its successes, challenges and areas of underperformance, to inform the development and strategic priorities of the new Country Strategy (FY28–32).

Collect situational analysis data across the following thematic areas: Education and Early Childhood Development (ECD); Health, Nutrition and WASH; Livelihoods, Skills and Work; Protection; and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) to inform the development of the new Country Strategy (CSFY28-32).

The following are the expected deliverables by the consultant:

1. CS evaluation report: A comprehensive report that summarizes the findings of the evaluation, including an analysis of the achievements, best practices, lessons learnt and challenges during the implementation of the Country Strategy (CSFY22-27).

2. Recommendations: A set of actionable recommendations based on the findings of the evaluation that will inform the design of the new Country Strategy (FY28-32).

3. Situational analysis report: A comprehensive report providing an in-depth assessment of the current situation across the following thematic areas: Education and Early Childhood Development (ECD); Health, Nutrition and WASH; Livelihoods, Skills and Work; Protection; and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR).

3.2 Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation will include the assessment of the following:

Effectiveness: To what extent and the reasons behind the achievement (or not) of the CS’s objectives, and whether these lead to unintended (positive or negative) consequences for anybody involved or affected by the CS.

Relevance: To what extent were the CS and its approaches suited to the priorities and policies of the people and communities it intended to benefit?

Efficiency: The extent to which financial resources were used economically and efficiently, potentially including cost-benefit ratios and alternative programming approaches to achieve the CS’s objectives.

Sustainability: The probability of continued long-term benefits to the target populations after the CS has been completed. This might include the resource and capacity of partners or beneficiaries to continue the intervention after phase out.

Child rights, gender and Inclusion: The extent to which the CS applies gender and inclusion sensitive approaches and explicitly aims for results that improve the rights of children and young people and gender equality.

3.3 Evaluation Criteria and Key Evaluation Questions

The evaluation will, in addition to collecting data to measure the indicators for each of the program as outlined in Annex 1 (Link: Results Framework and/or List of indicators to be assessed), seek to answer the following questions:

Questions

Evaluation criteria

1. To what extent has Plan International Zambia's FY22–27 Country Strategy achieved or contributed to the intended results across LEARN, DECIDE and THRIVE, and what factors explain variations in performance?

2. Did the Country Strategy realize what was initially planned, including the most significant changes against project indicators compared to the baseline and mid-term review? What factors were crucial for achieving or failing to achieve the project objectives so far?

What have been the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the Country Strategy, including enabling factors, barriers and bottlenecks?

Effectiveness

1. To what extent has the Country Strategy remained relevant and appropriately aligned with the needs of children, young people and communities, national priorities and Plan International's strategic priorities, given changes in the operating context?

2. To what extent did the intervention address CS stakeholders’ needs and interests?

3. To what extent did the CS priorities (objectives, thematic focus) comply with government humanitarian and development policies and plans?

4. Are the activities and strategies of the CS consistent with its overall objectives and the attainment of the intended impact and effect?

Relevance and strategic coherence

1. To what extent have financial, human and operational resources been used efficiently to deliver the Country Strategy (CS) results, and what approaches demonstrate potential for improved value for money and scale?

2.To what extent did expenditure and resource allocation correspond to the results achieved, and what were the main cost drivers and factors affecting implementation efficiency across strategic choices and geographies?

3.Could the interventions have achieved the same or better results through alternative, more cost-effective approaches or with fewer resources, taking into account the initial planned budget, actual expenditure and programme results?

4.Were the interventions delivered according to the agreed timeframes, and what factors contributed to delays or enabled timely implementation?

Efficiency

Proposed evaluation questions are below:

1. To what extent are the results and outcomes achieved through the Country Strategy likely to be sustained beyond Plan International Zambia’s direct support, and what factors influence their durability?

2. To what extent have the CS strengthened ownership, capacities, systems and partnerships among government, partners and communities to enable the continuation and sustainability of results and interventions beyond Plan’s support?

3. To what extent are CS interventions and approaches institutionalized within government and partner policies, plans, systems and budgets, and are adequate financial, human and institutional resources available to sustain or scale them?

4. What are the key barriers, bottlenecks and enabling factors affecting the sustainability and institutionalization of CS results and programmes, and what are the prospects for their continuation, replication or scale-up after Plan support ends?

Sustainability

Proposed evaluation questions are below:

1. To what extent has the CS contributed to addressing structural gender inequalities and advancing child rights, gender equality and social inclusion, particularly for girls and marginalized groups?

2. To what extent has the CS identified and addressed the specific barriers faced by marginalized and excluded groups, including children and young people with disabilities, and how equitably have CS results been experienced across different population groups?

3. To what extent have girls, children and young people from marginalized groups, including persons with disabilities, meaningfully participated in the design, implementation, monitoring and decision-making processes of the CS, and how has their participation influenced programme decisions and outcomes?

4. To what extent have CS approaches been gender transformative challenging discriminatory gender norms, power relations and underlying structural inequalities rather than primarily gender sensitive, and what evidence demonstrates changes in gender norms, roles and power relations?

Child rights, gender and inclusion

3.5 Evaluation Matrix

The evaluator shall develop and submit a detailed Evaluation Matrix as part of the technical proposal and subsequently refine it during the inception phase. The Evaluation Matrix shall provide a clear methodological link between the evaluation questions, evidence requirements, data collection methods and proposed analysis (Link: Annex 2).

3.6 Child rights, gender transformative and inclusion

In line with Plan International’s values and organizational ambition, the evaluation should mainstream a gender equality, child rights and inclusion lens across all evaluation questions, methods, sampling and analysis. Beyond assessing whether the Country Strategy (CS) adopted gender- and inclusion-sensitive approaches, the evaluation should examine the extent to which CS programmes contributed to gender transformation and advancing girls’ rights and power.

Specifically, the evaluation should assess the following dimensions:

Gender transformation: The extent to which CS interventions challenged and contributed to changing discriminatory gender norms, roles, attitudes and practices, rather than simply accommodating existing gender inequalities through gender-sensitive programming.
Power relations: The extent to which interventions addressed unequal power relations between girls and boys, women and men, and other relevant groups, including changes in decision-making power, agency, voice, control over resources and opportunities.
Meaningful participation: The extent to which girls, children and young people, particularly those from marginalized groups, were meaningfully involved in the design, implementation, monitoring and decision-making processes of the CS, and whether their views influenced decisions and programme adaptations.
Disability inclusion: The extent to which the CS identified and addressed barriers experienced by children and young people with disabilities and ensured their equitable access, participation, representation and benefit from interventions.
Intersectionality: The extent to which the CS recognized and responded to the ways in which gender intersects with disability, age, poverty, location, ethnicity, social status and other factors to create multiple and overlapping forms of discrimination and exclusion.
Barriers to access and participation: The extent to which structural, social, cultural, economic, institutional, physical and attitudinal barriers prevented different population groups from accessing, participating in or benefiting from CS interventions, and the effectiveness of measures taken to address these barriers.
Differential results and equity: The extent to which CS results varied across population groups, including by sex, age, disability, geographic location, socioeconomic status and other relevant characteristics, and whether interventions reduced or inadvertently reinforced inequalities.
Sustainability of gender and inclusion gains: The extent to which changes in gender norms, power relations, participation, inclusion and access are likely to be sustained and embedded within community, partner and institutional systems.

4.0 Users of the Evaluation

Primary users will comprise PIZ staff; Plan International Regional and Global Hub staff; global, regional and thematic technical teams; relevant Government of Zambia ministries and departments; and key implementing, strategic and advocacy partners. These stakeholders will use the evaluation findings to determine the extent to which the Country Strategy achieved its intended outcomes, support strategic and programme-level decision-making, enhance programme quality and accountability, inform resource allocation and value-for-money considerations, shape the development of the subsequent Country Strategy, and identify effective approaches that could be institutionalized, sustained or scaled up.

Secondary users will include donors and funding partners; civil society organizations and advocacy networks; development and sector stakeholders; academic and research institutions; and, where appropriate, communities, children and young people, particularly girls and marginalized groups. Through accessible, inclusive and age-appropriate communication products, these stakeholders will use the evaluation findings to promote learning and advocacy, strengthen policy dialogue and accountability, improve programming, generate evidence and knowledge, and support the replication, continuation or scale-up of successful approaches.

5.0 Methods for Data Collection and Analysis

The assignment will require the utilization of a mixed method which is gender sensitive. Both qualitative and quantitative data/information must be obtained. In order to meet the objectives of the assignment, data will be collected through various methods including, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs).

Other data collection methods will include document reviews (baselines, MTR etc), surveys and interviews with key external and internal stakeholders, such as representative of line ministries both at national and district level, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), implementing project partners, community leaders, Community Based Organizations (CBOs), beneficiaries (boys, girls, men, & women), National Offices, Management and Plan staff.

The assignment is expected to examine all three programs (LEARN, DECIDE AND THRIVE) in the each of the Program Areas. The review will include a desk review, based on documentation obtained at Country Office (CO), official national documents and documents in Program Areas. It is expected that interviews will be conducted with stakeholders in all Plan International Zambia operational areas.

The findings and recommendations will be based on the triangulation of results obtained from all the above sources and firmly grounded in proper research and sampling design that reflects the entirety of the proposed review and in line with acceptable international standards. Methods proposed with children must be participatory and age appropriate and those that will elicit best possible results.

5.1 Sample

Where primary data collection is undertaken as part of the evaluation, the review team should outline the intended sample strategy that includes a description of (alternatively adopt the sampling strategy used during baseline for easy comparisons):

- Sample size (or expectations of the review team in calculating it)

- Necessary respondent disaggregation (refer to Plan International’s Minimum Beneficiary Disaggregation)

- Number and type of locations

- Sampling approach

5.2 Participant selection and recruitment

Meaningful and inclusive stakeholder participation at different levels will be central to the review process. The evaluation team shall develop a clear participant-selection and stakeholder-engagement approach that ensures diverse and representative perspectives are captured across the areas and populations covered by the review. Participants should include girls and boys, young women and men, caregivers and families(including child-headed and female-headed households, persons with disabilities and other marginalised or underserved groups) as well as community leaders, service providers, local authorities, district and national government representatives, Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), Community-Based Organisations (CBOs), implementing and service-delivery partners, focal point persons, representatives of relevant governing bodies, Plan International staff and beneficiaries of Plan International programmes and projects.

The evaluator shall ensure that participant selection is inclusive, transparent and appropriately balanced, taking into account factors such as gender, age, disability, geographic location, socioeconomic status, vulnerability and other relevant dimensions of diversity and marginalisation. The sampling approach should minimise selection bias by using clearly defined selection criteria, appropriate sampling techniques and, where feasible, independent or systematic participant selection rather than relying solely on readily accessible participants or programme staff recommendations. The evaluator should document and justify the sampling strategy, including how hard-to-reach and underrepresented groups will be identified and included.

Particular emphasis shall be placed on ensuring the meaningful participation of children and young people, rather than treating them only as beneficiaries or respondents. Their participation should be voluntary, safe, inclusive, participatory and age-appropriate, with appropriate consent and assent procedures and safeguarding measures in place. The evaluator shall use methods that enable children and young people, including those with disabilities and from marginalised groups, to express their views freely and safely. Stakeholder engagement should provide opportunities for participants to contribute their experiences, perspectives and recommendations throughout the review, while ensuring confidentiality, accessibility and respect for participants' rights and dignity.

6.0 Ethics and Child Protection

The review team must comply with Plan International Zambia’s safeguarding, ethical and data protection requirements, with all team members signing the relevant policies before the assignment. The evaluator must complete a MERL safeguarding and ethical risk assessment, identify risks to children and vulnerable groups, and establish appropriate mitigation measures and consent/assent procedures.

All evaluation data must be confidential, securely managed and appropriately anonymized, with clear procedures for data protection, storage and disposal. The evaluator must also establish safeguarding referral and response mechanisms for any concerns or disclosures arising during the evaluation.

Data collection involving children and vulnerable groups must be safe, inclusive, participatory and age-appropriate, supported by trained data collectors and appropriate accessibility and gender-sensitive measures. Compliance documentation, including the safeguarding risk assessment, consent procedures, data protection arrangements and referral mechanisms, must be submitted during inception and is a prerequisite for undertaking the evaluation.

Plan International is committed to ensuring that the rights of those participating in data collection or analysis are respected and protected, in accordance with Ethical MERL Framework and our Child and Youth Safeguarding Policy. All applicants should include details in their proposal on how they will ensure ethics and child protection in the data collection process. Specifically, the review team shall explain how appropriate, safe, non-discriminatory and non-stereotyping participation of all stakeholders will be ensured and how special attention will be paid to the needs of children and other vulnerable groups (including those living with disabilities). The review team shall also explain how confidentiality and anonymity of participants will be guaranteed.

7.0 KEY DELIVERABLES

1.

I. Deliverable: Inception Report

II. Format: Word Document

III. Length: Max. 10 Pages

IV. Detail : Inception report shall include

- An Updated Timeline

- Detailed Methodology, including draft sampling methodology and size

- Draft Data collection tools

- Ethical Considerations

- Consent forms of any primary data collection

- Methods of data analysis

Brief justification of the methods and techniques used ( including relevant underlying values and assumptions/ theories) with a justification of the selections made (e.g of persons interviewed).

2.

I. Deliverable: Draft Evaluation Report

II. Format: Word Document

III. Length: Max. 30 Pages

3.

I. Deliverable: Final Evaluation Report(Including Executive Summary)

II. Format: PDF Document

III. Length: Max. 30 Pages

4.

I. Deliverable: Cleaned Data (Including Transcripts)

II. Detail: Including Data Files (e.g Excel, SPSS), Transcripts of qualitative data, syntax/ code books etc.)

8.0 Timeline

1.

Activity: Submiss of inceptions report

Time: 19.10.2026 – 23.10.2026

Days Of Work: 5 Work Days